AC*State Administrative Standards Review

1. AC*State Administrative Standards Review Informational Meeting: 2007

2. History • Spring 1998- present • A Standards Working Group • May-Sept 1999 • The Standards Pilot Project completed • February 2000 • OMB approved the State Administrative Standards Reviews

3. History • 2000-2004 • All State commissions completed an Administrative Standards Review • 2004-2006 • Seventeen commissions completed a second Administrative Standards Review • May-Sept 2007 • Six to seven additional commissions will complete a second Administrative Standards Review

4. PURPOSE • To ensure that State commissions have adequate operational systems in place for the administration of federal funds in order to implement national service • The Corporation has an effective tool for assessing state commission systems • And State commissions with quality administrative capacities are recognized

5. Objectives • To establish basic competencies of state commission operations • To provide: • a set of standards that all commissions must meet without prescribing the strategy each commission uses to achieve the standards • a consistent strategy for assessing the capacity of all state commissions

6. Objectives • To help: • state commissions identify areas for continuous improvement and technical assistance needs • the Corporation identify priorities for training and technical assistance in order to strengthen the capacity of commissions

7. Expected Commission Actions • Prior to ASR Review: • Assess existing Commission capacities (e.g., by using ASR tool) • Work with Corporation PO, GO, TO and TASC to address identified weaknesses (develop policies and practice) • Work with ASR Review Team Leader to plan logistics for week of review • Collect and prepare documents for ASR Review Team

8. Expected Commission Actions • Post the ASR Review: • Resolve un-met Standards elements within the required timelines • Six months from the Standards review date to resolve all unmet critical elements • A year from the Standards review date to meet all unmet elements • Resolving unmet elements within the required Corporation timeline can impact new competitive and special initiative funding for a commission

9. ASR Review Team • Corporation staff and outside contractors (4 to 5 people): • Team Leader • liaison between the review team and the commission executive director • Financial Expert • responsible for fiscal Standards 4 and 8 • The AmeriCorps* State Program Officer

10. ASR Review Team • Team Member(s): • Contractor or Corporation for National & Community Service staff • Corporation staff may be from headquarters or from state offices • The state office staff will not be from the same state as the commission

11. Review of Week’s Activities • The ASR Review team leader will work with the commission’s executive director to create a review-week plan that considers the needs of the commission staff and of the review team

12. Review Week - Interviews • Four Standards interview modules: • Program directors, commission staff, commissioners, and outside stakeholders • The team leader works with the executive director to: • Develop the interview scheduled * (Typically 8-10 interviews are conduted) • The Team Leader: • Establishes the interview schedule

13. Review Week - Interviews • Purpose: • To give a “human story” to the documentation being reviewed by the Standards review team • To corroborate the administrative systems of the commissions The interviews are not directly quoted in the report • A report might include the following example: • “Interviews with program directors confirmed that programs are asked to complete a needs assessment on an annual basis”

14. Review Week: Monday A.M. • Orientation meeting: • Facilitated by the ASR team leader • It is most effective if the entire commission staff is present for the meeting • Other participants and stakeholders (at the option of the executive director) may participate, including the commission chair, vice chair and other commissioners, outside financial support staff, executive director supervisor, state office director, and the SEA director

15. Review Week: Mon-Wed • Work on the Standards at the Commission (Am and PM): • Team members will talk with individual staff members, conduct interviews, review documentation, and conduct a site visit to one program • During this time the team leader will stay in contact with the executive director regarding the progress of the review

16. Review Week: Thursday • Work on the Standards Report: • The review team will use Thursday to write up the Standards report and to meet as a team to discuss the findings • The team will also use Thursday for any follow-up questions for commission staff • Either Thursday or early Friday, the team leader will meet with the executive director to describe the preliminary findings of the review

17. Review Week: Friday • Exit meeting consisting of: • The review team • Commission staff • Other attendees (in the review-week orientation meeting) that the ED would like to also invite to the exit meeting

18. ASR Information • Including: • FAQs • History, purpose, week of the review • Most updated revision of the ASR tool • Available at: • http://www.americorps.org/for_organizations/manage/oversight.asp * Please note that slight changes may be made to the ASR tool through January 2007

19. OVERVIEW of ASR TOOL • Standard 1: Uses a Planning and Assessment Process • Objective: • The Commission has a planning and assessment process for developing strategies and objectives that reflect its mission, resources and constituencies • For example, the Standard reviews whether the Commission has: • A mission statement developed with input from stakeholders • Begun the process of implementing a State Service Plan

20. Standard 2 • Standard 2: Staff management and Effective Board Governance • Objective: • The Commission practices good management procedures and helps ensure that Commissioners fulfill their roles • For example, the Standard reviews whether the Commission: • Has an adequate complement of staff for its work • Follows the state system or requirements for managing commissions or board activities • Complies with federal requirements regarding the composition of State Commissions

21. Standard 3 • Standard 3: Communicates with and Generates Support from Outside Sources • Objectives: • The Commission takes a proactive approach to communicating and generating support • Ensures that a wide variety of constituencies are informed about national service in the state • Takes action to generate support for the Commission and for national service programs • For example, the Standard reviews whether the Commission: • Can show support from the public and private sectors, and community based organizations • Regularly communicates information

22. Standard 4 • Standard 4: Utilizes Appropriate Financial and Management Systems • Objective: • Appropriate administrative and financial oversight and reporting • For example, the Standard reviews whether the Commission: • Is appropriately established by legislation or executive order • Uses a financial management system for its awards • Has written financial policies and procedures • Meets Admin Match

23. Standard 5 • Standard 5: Conducts Proper Subgrant Process • Objective: • The Commission conducts a grant process for all its Corporation sub-grants that follows both state and federal requirements • For example, the Standard reviews whether the Commission: • Has a written RFP • Has an adequate process to assist interested parties in applying • Has an adequate peer review process

24. Standard 6 • Standard 6: Properly Monitors Sub-grantees and Ensures Compliance • Objective: • The Commission conducts proper oversight of all of its Corporation sub-grantees • For example, the Standard reviews the following: • Risk-based monitoring strategies • Standardized site-visit monitoring tools • Monitoring sub-grantees’ member enrollment procedures • Monitoring sub-grantees’ procedures for conducting criminal back-ground checks • Reviewing sub-grantees’ grievance procedure • Establishing and tracking performance measures

25. Standard 7 • Standard 7: Implements a System for Training and Technical Assistance • Objective: • The Commission provides adequate training and technical assistance for its Corporation sub-grantees • Reviews whether the Commission has an adequate process for: • Assessing the T&TA needs of its sub-grantees • Providing T&TA for its sub-grantees

26. Standard 8 • Standard 8: Provides Appropriate Financial Oversight for Sub-grantees • Objective: • Appropriate review, monitoring, oversight, and assistance for the financial and administrative policies and practices of sub-grantees • Reviews whether the Commission: • Has an adequate pre-award process • Can ensure proper issuance of awards • Reviews FSRs, PERs and support documents • Sub-grantees meet match • Tracks, audits and closes out sub-grantee awards

27. T & TA is available: for preparing for the reviews and post review to provide assistance in meeting unmet Standards T & TA providers: Project TASC ( this includes the coordination of peer exchanges) ETR for samples of best practices Walker and Company (fiscal) OLDT for any other direction to specific providers T & TA

28. T & TA • Assistance must be requested by the State Commissions • If you have any questions please telephone your CNCS Program Officer or Training Officer

29. AC*State Administrative Standards Review Informational Meeting: 2007